%------------------------------------------------------------------------------ % File : Princess---230619 % Problem : SWC462_1 : TPTP v8.3.0. Released v8.3.0. % Transfm : none % Format : tptp % Command : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s % Computer : n021.cluster.edu % Model : x86_64 x86_64 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 2.10GHz % Memory : 8042.1875MB % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64 % CPULimit : 300s % WCLimit : 300s % DateTime : Tue May 14 09:00:31 EDT 2024 % Result : Theorem 7.87s 1.81s % Output : Proof 9.20s % Verified : % SZS Type : - % Comments : %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation %------------------------------------------------------------------------------ %----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT % 0.10/0.12 % Problem : SWC462_1 : TPTP v8.3.0. Released v8.3.0. % 0.10/0.13 % Command : princess -inputFormat=tptp +threads -portfolio=casc +printProof -timeoutSec=%d %s % 0.13/0.34 % Computer : n021.cluster.edu % 0.13/0.34 % Model : x86_64 x86_64 % 0.13/0.34 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz % 0.13/0.34 % Memory : 8042.1875MB % 0.13/0.34 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64 % 0.13/0.34 % CPULimit : 300 % 0.13/0.34 % WCLimit : 300 % 0.13/0.34 % DateTime : Mon May 13 14:52:08 EDT 2024 % 0.13/0.34 % CPUTime : % 0.66/0.64 ________ _____ % 0.66/0.64 ___ __ \_________(_)________________________________ % 0.66/0.64 __ /_/ /_ ___/_ /__ __ \ ___/ _ \_ ___/_ ___/ % 0.66/0.64 _ ____/_ / _ / _ / / / /__ / __/(__ )_(__ ) % 0.66/0.64 /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/ /_/\___/ \___//____/ /____/ % 0.66/0.64 % 0.66/0.64 A Theorem Prover for First-Order Logic modulo Linear Integer Arithmetic % 0.66/0.64 (2023-06-19) % 0.66/0.64 % 0.66/0.64 (c) Philipp Rümmer, 2009-2023 % 0.66/0.64 Contributors: Peter Backeman, Peter Baumgartner, Angelo Brillout, Zafer Esen, % 0.66/0.64 Amanda Stjerna. % 0.66/0.64 Free software under BSD-3-Clause. % 0.66/0.64 % 0.66/0.64 For more information, visit http://www.philipp.ruemmer.org/princess.shtml % 0.66/0.64 % 0.66/0.64 Loading /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p ... % 0.66/0.65 Running up to 7 provers in parallel. % 0.66/0.66 Prover 2: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMinimalAndEmpty -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1065072994 % 0.66/0.66 Prover 1: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1571432423 % 0.66/0.66 Prover 0: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1042961893 % 0.66/0.66 Prover 3: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1922548996 % 0.66/0.66 Prover 4: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=1868514696 % 0.66/0.66 Prover 5: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allMaximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1259561288 % 0.66/0.66 Prover 6: Options: -triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none +reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximalOutermost -realRatSaturationRounds=0 -ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=never -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1399714365 % 2.70/1.08 Prover 5: Preprocessing ... % 2.70/1.09 Prover 3: Preprocessing ... % 2.70/1.09 Prover 1: Preprocessing ... % 2.70/1.09 Prover 4: Preprocessing ... % 2.70/1.09 Prover 0: Preprocessing ... % 2.70/1.09 Prover 2: Preprocessing ... % 2.70/1.09 Prover 6: Preprocessing ... % 3.73/1.29 Prover 4: Constructing countermodel ... % 3.73/1.29 Prover 6: Constructing countermodel ... % 3.73/1.29 Prover 3: Constructing countermodel ... % 3.73/1.29 Prover 1: Constructing countermodel ... % 4.27/1.31 Prover 0: Proving ... % 4.27/1.31 Prover 5: Proving ... % 4.27/1.32 Prover 2: Proving ... % 7.87/1.81 Prover 0: proved (1154ms) % 7.87/1.81 % 7.87/1.81 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 7.87/1.81 % 7.87/1.82 Prover 5: proved (1150ms) % 7.87/1.82 % 7.87/1.82 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 7.87/1.82 % 7.87/1.82 Prover 6: stopped % 7.87/1.82 Prover 2: stopped % 8.02/1.83 Prover 3: stopped % 8.02/1.83 Prover 7: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple +reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-236303470 % 8.02/1.83 Prover 8: Options: +triggersInConjecture +genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=none -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-200781089 % 8.02/1.83 Prover 10: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=919308125 % 8.02/1.83 Prover 11: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms +tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation -boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=allUni -realRatSaturationRounds=1 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=all -randomSeed=-1509710984 % 8.02/1.83 Prover 13: Options: +triggersInConjecture -genTotalityAxioms -tightFunctionScopes -clausifier=simple -reverseFunctionalityPropagation +boolFunsAsPreds -triggerStrategy=maximal -realRatSaturationRounds=0 +ignoreQuantifiers -constructProofs=always -generateTriggers=complete -randomSeed=1138197443 % 8.02/1.86 Prover 8: Preprocessing ... % 8.02/1.86 Prover 10: Preprocessing ... % 8.02/1.86 Prover 7: Preprocessing ... % 8.02/1.87 Prover 13: Preprocessing ... % 8.02/1.87 Prover 11: Preprocessing ... % 8.02/1.90 Prover 10: Constructing countermodel ... % 8.02/1.91 Prover 7: Constructing countermodel ... % 8.02/1.91 Prover 8: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 8.73/1.92 Prover 8: Constructing countermodel ... % 8.73/1.92 Prover 11: Constructing countermodel ... % 8.73/1.94 Prover 13: Warning: ignoring some quantifiers % 8.73/1.95 Prover 13: Constructing countermodel ... % 8.73/1.95 Prover 4: Found proof (size 46) % 8.73/1.95 Prover 4: proved (1295ms) % 8.73/1.95 Prover 7: stopped % 8.73/1.95 Prover 8: stopped % 8.73/1.95 Prover 10: stopped % 8.73/1.95 Prover 11: stopped % 8.73/1.95 Prover 13: stopped % 8.73/1.96 Prover 1: stopped % 8.73/1.96 % 8.73/1.96 % SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p % 8.73/1.96 % 8.73/1.97 % SZS output start Proof for theBenchmark % 8.73/1.97 Assumptions after simplification: % 8.73/1.97 --------------------------------- % 8.73/1.97 % 8.73/1.97 (conjecture_1) % 8.73/1.99 ? [v0: int] : ? [v1: int] : ? [v2: int] : ( ~ (v2 = v1) & $lesseq(0, v0) & % 8.73/1.99 fast(v0) = v2 & small(v0) = v1) % 8.73/1.99 % 8.73/1.99 (formula_1) % 8.73/1.99 ! [v0: int] : ! [v1: int] : ! [v2: int] : ( ~ (f0(v0, v1) = v2) | % 8.73/1.99 $product($sum(v0, 2), $sum(v1, v0)) = v2) % 8.73/1.99 % 8.73/1.99 (formula_10) % 9.20/1.99 ! [v0: int] : ! [v1: int] : ! [v2: int] : (v2 = v1 | ~ ($lesseq(v0, 0) | % 9.20/1.99 ~ (u1(v0, v1) = v2)) & ! [v0: int] : ! [v1: int] : ! [v2: int] : ( ~ % 9.20/1.99 ($lesseq(1, v0)) | ~ (u1($sum(v0, -1), v1) = v2) | ? [v3: int] : (u1(v0, % 9.20/1.99 v1) = v3 & f1(v2) = v3)) & ! [v0: int] : ! [v1: int] : ! [v2: int] % 9.20/1.99 : ( ~ ($lesseq(1, v0)) | ~ (u1(v0, v1) = v2) | ? [v3: int] : (u1($sum(v0, % 9.20/1.99 -1), v1) = v3 & f1(v3) = v2)) % 9.20/1.99 % 9.20/1.99 (formula_11) % 9.20/1.99 u1(g1, h1) = v1 % 9.20/1.99 % 9.20/1.99 (formula_12) % 9.20/1.99 ! [v0: int] : ! [v1: int] : ( ~ (fast(v0) = v1) | ? [v2: int] : % 9.20/1.99 ($difference($product(2, v2), v1) = -1 & $product(v1, v0) = v2)) % 9.20/1.99 % 9.20/1.99 (formula_2) % 9.20/1.99 g0 = 2 % 9.20/1.99 % 9.20/1.99 (formula_3) % 9.20/1.99 h0 = 2 % 9.20/1.99 % 9.20/1.99 (formula_4) % 9.20/2.00 ! [v0: int] : ! [v1: int] : ! [v2: int] : (v2 = v1 | ~ ($lesseq(v0, 0) | % 9.20/2.00 ~ (u0(v0, v1) = v2)) & ! [v0: int] : ! [v1: int] : ! [v2: int] : ( ~ % 9.20/2.00 ($lesseq(1, v0)) | ~ (u0($sum(v0, -1), v1) = v2) | ? [v3: int] : (u0(v0, % 9.20/2.00 v1) = v3 & f0(v2, v0) = v3)) & ! [v0: int] : ! [v1: int] : ! [v2: % 9.20/2.00 int] : ( ~ ($lesseq(1, v0)) | ~ (u0(v0, v1) = v2) | ? [v3: int] : % 9.20/2.00 (u0($sum(v0, -1), v1) = v3 & f0(v3, v0) = v2)) % 9.20/2.00 % 9.20/2.00 (formula_5) % 9.20/2.00 u0(g0, h0) = v0 % 9.20/2.00 % 9.20/2.00 (formula_6) % 9.20/2.00 ! [v0: int] : ! [v1: int] : ( ~ (small(v0) = v1) | ? [v2: int] : % 9.20/2.00 ($difference($product(2, v2), v1) = -1 & $product(v0, v0) = v2)) % 9.20/2.00 % 9.20/2.00 (formula_7) % 9.20/2.00 ! [v0: int] : ! [v1: int] : ( ~ (f1(v0) = v1) | $product(v0, v0) = v1) % 9.20/2.00 % 9.20/2.00 (formula_8) % 9.20/2.00 g1 = 1 % 9.20/2.00 % 9.20/2.00 (formula_9) % 9.20/2.00 h1 = 14 % 9.20/2.00 % 9.20/2.00 Those formulas are unsatisfiable: % 9.20/2.00 --------------------------------- % 9.20/2.00 % 9.20/2.00 Begin of proof % 9.20/2.00 | % 9.20/2.00 | ALPHA: (formula_4) implies: % 9.20/2.01 | (1) ! [v0: int] : ! [v1: int] : ! [v2: int] : ( ~ ($lesseq(1, v0)) | ~ % 9.20/2.01 | (u0(v0, v1) = v2) | ? [v3: int] : (u0($sum(v0, -1), v1) = v3 & % 9.20/2.01 | f0(v3, v0) = v2)) % 9.20/2.01 | (2) ! [v0: int] : ! [v1: int] : ! [v2: int] : (v2 = v1 | ~ ($lesseq(v0, % 9.20/2.01 | 0) | ~ (u0(v0, v1) = v2)) % 9.20/2.01 | % 9.20/2.01 | ALPHA: (formula_10) implies: % 9.20/2.01 | (3) ! [v0: int] : ! [v1: int] : ! [v2: int] : ( ~ ($lesseq(1, v0)) | ~ % 9.20/2.01 | (u1(v0, v1) = v2) | ? [v3: int] : (u1($sum(v0, -1), v1) = v3 & % 9.20/2.01 | f1(v3) = v2)) % 9.20/2.01 | (4) ! [v0: int] : ! [v1: int] : ! [v2: int] : (v2 = v1 | ~ ($lesseq(v0, % 9.20/2.01 | 0) | ~ (u1(v0, v1) = v2)) % 9.20/2.01 | % 9.20/2.01 | DELTA: instantiating (conjecture_1) with fresh symbols all_10_0, all_10_1, % 9.20/2.01 | all_10_2 gives: % 9.20/2.01 | (5) ~ (all_10_0 = all_10_1) & $lesseq(0, all_10_2) & fast(all_10_2) = % 9.20/2.01 | all_10_0 & small(all_10_2) = all_10_1 % 9.20/2.01 | % 9.20/2.01 | ALPHA: (5) implies: % 9.20/2.01 | (6) ~ (all_10_0 = all_10_1) % 9.20/2.01 | (7) small(all_10_2) = all_10_1 % 9.20/2.01 | (8) fast(all_10_2) = all_10_0 % 9.20/2.01 | % 9.20/2.01 | REDUCE: (formula_11), (formula_8), (formula_9) imply: % 9.20/2.01 | (9) u1(1, 14) = v1 % 9.20/2.01 | % 9.20/2.01 | REDUCE: (formula_2), (formula_3), (formula_5) imply: % 9.20/2.01 | (10) u0(2, 2) = v0 % 9.20/2.01 | % 9.20/2.01 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (1) with 2, 2, v0, simplifying with (10) gives: % 9.20/2.02 | (11) ? [v0: int] : (u0(1, 2) = v0 & f0(v0, 2) = v0) % 9.20/2.02 | % 9.20/2.02 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (formula_6) with all_10_2, all_10_1, simplifying % 9.20/2.02 | with (7) gives: % 9.20/2.02 | (12) ? [v0: int] : ($difference($product(2, v0), all_10_1) = -1 & % 9.20/2.02 | $product(v0, all_10_2) = v0) % 9.20/2.02 | % 9.20/2.02 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (3) with 1, 14, v1, simplifying with (9) gives: % 9.20/2.02 | (13) ? [v0: int] : (u1(0, 14) = v0 & f1(v0) = v1) % 9.20/2.02 | % 9.20/2.02 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (formula_12) with all_10_2, all_10_0, simplifying % 9.20/2.02 | with (8) gives: % 9.20/2.02 | (14) ? [v0: int] : ($difference($product(2, v0), all_10_0) = -1 & % 9.20/2.02 | $product(v1, all_10_2) = v0) % 9.20/2.02 | % 9.20/2.02 | DELTA: instantiating (14) with fresh symbol all_20_0 gives: % 9.20/2.02 | (15) $difference($product(2, all_20_0), all_10_0) = -1 & $product(v1, % 9.20/2.02 | all_10_2) = all_20_0 % 9.20/2.02 | % 9.20/2.02 | ALPHA: (15) implies: % 9.20/2.02 | (16) $difference($product(2, all_20_0), all_10_0) = -1 % 9.20/2.02 | (17) $product(v1, all_10_2) = all_20_0 % 9.20/2.02 | % 9.20/2.02 | DELTA: instantiating (11) with fresh symbol all_24_0 gives: % 9.20/2.02 | (18) u0(1, 2) = all_24_0 & f0(all_24_0, 2) = v0 % 9.20/2.02 | % 9.20/2.02 | ALPHA: (18) implies: % 9.20/2.02 | (19) f0(all_24_0, 2) = v0 % 9.20/2.02 | (20) u0(1, 2) = all_24_0 % 9.20/2.02 | % 9.20/2.02 | DELTA: instantiating (12) with fresh symbol all_28_0 gives: % 9.20/2.02 | (21) $difference($product(2, all_28_0), all_10_1) = -1 & $product(v0, % 9.20/2.02 | all_10_2) = all_28_0 % 9.20/2.02 | % 9.20/2.02 | ALPHA: (21) implies: % 9.20/2.02 | (22) $difference($product(2, all_28_0), all_10_1) = -1 % 9.20/2.02 | (23) $product(v0, all_10_2) = all_28_0 % 9.20/2.02 | % 9.20/2.02 | DELTA: instantiating (13) with fresh symbol all_30_0 gives: % 9.20/2.02 | (24) u1(0, 14) = all_30_0 & f1(all_30_0) = v1 % 9.20/2.02 | % 9.20/2.02 | ALPHA: (24) implies: % 9.20/2.02 | (25) f1(all_30_0) = v1 % 9.20/2.02 | (26) u1(0, 14) = all_30_0 % 9.20/2.02 | % 9.20/2.02 | COL_REDUCE: introducing fresh symbol sc_32_0_0 defined by: % 9.20/2.02 | (27) $difference(all_28_0, all_10_1) = sc_32_0_0 % 9.20/2.02 | % 9.20/2.02 | COMBINE_EQS: (22), (27) imply: % 9.20/2.03 | (28) $sum(all_10_1, $product(2, sc_32_0_0)) = -1 % 9.20/2.03 | % 9.20/2.03 | COMBINE_EQS: (27), (28) imply: % 9.20/2.03 | (29) $sum(all_28_0, sc_32_0_0) = -1 % 9.20/2.03 | % 9.20/2.03 | COL_REDUCE: introducing fresh symbol sc_32_0_1 defined by: % 9.20/2.03 | (30) $difference(all_20_0, all_10_0) = sc_32_0_1 % 9.20/2.03 | % 9.20/2.03 | COMBINE_EQS: (16), (30) imply: % 9.20/2.03 | (31) $sum(all_10_0, $product(2, sc_32_0_1)) = -1 % 9.20/2.03 | % 9.20/2.03 | COMBINE_EQS: (30), (31) imply: % 9.20/2.03 | (32) $sum(all_20_0, sc_32_0_1) = -1 % 9.20/2.03 | % 9.20/2.03 | REDUCE: (6), (28), (31) imply: % 9.20/2.03 | (33) ~ (sc_32_0_1 = sc_32_0_0) % 9.20/2.03 | % 9.20/2.03 | SIMP: (33) implies: % 9.20/2.03 | (34) ~ (sc_32_0_1 = sc_32_0_0) % 9.20/2.03 | % 9.20/2.03 | REDUCE: (23), (29) imply: % 9.20/2.03 | (35) $product(v0, all_10_2) = $difference(-1, sc_32_0_0) % 9.20/2.03 | % 9.20/2.03 | REDUCE: (17), (32) imply: % 9.20/2.03 | (36) $product(v1, all_10_2) = $difference(-1, sc_32_0_1) % 9.20/2.03 | % 9.20/2.03 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (4) with 0, 14, all_30_0, simplifying with (26) % 9.20/2.03 | gives: % 9.20/2.03 | (37) all_30_0 = 14 % 9.20/2.03 | % 9.20/2.03 | REDUCE: (25), (37) imply: % 9.20/2.03 | (38) f1(14) = v1 % 9.20/2.03 | % 9.20/2.03 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (formula_1) with all_24_0, 2, v0, simplifying with % 9.20/2.03 | (19) gives: % 9.20/2.03 | (39) $product($sum(all_24_0, 2), $sum(all_24_0, 2)) = v0 % 9.20/2.03 | % 9.20/2.03 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (1) with 1, 2, all_24_0, simplifying with (20) % 9.20/2.03 | gives: % 9.20/2.03 | (40) ? [v0: int] : (u0(0, 2) = v0 & f0(v0, 1) = all_24_0) % 9.20/2.03 | % 9.20/2.03 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (formula_7) with 14, v1, simplifying with (38) % 9.20/2.03 | gives: % 9.20/2.03 | (41) $product(14, 14) = v1 % 9.20/2.03 | % 9.20/2.03 | DELTA: instantiating (40) with fresh symbol all_49_0 gives: % 9.20/2.03 | (42) u0(0, 2) = all_49_0 & f0(all_49_0, 1) = all_24_0 % 9.20/2.03 | % 9.20/2.03 | ALPHA: (42) implies: % 9.20/2.03 | (43) f0(all_49_0, 1) = all_24_0 % 9.20/2.03 | (44) u0(0, 2) = all_49_0 % 9.20/2.03 | % 9.20/2.03 | THEORY_AXIOM GroebnerMultiplication: % 9.20/2.03 | (45) ! [v0: int] : ! [v1: int] : ! [v2: int] : ($sum(v2, $product(196, % 9.20/2.03 | v1)) = -1 | ~ ($product(v0, v1) = $difference(-1, v2)) | ~ % 9.20/2.03 | ($product(14, 14) = v0)) % 9.20/2.03 | % 9.20/2.03 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (45) with v1, all_10_2, sc_32_0_1, simplifying with % 9.20/2.03 | (36), (41) gives: % 9.20/2.03 | (46) $sum(sc_32_0_1, $product(196, all_10_2)) = -1 % 9.20/2.03 | % 9.20/2.03 | REDUCE: (34), (46) imply: % 9.20/2.03 | (47) ~ ($sum(sc_32_0_0, $product(196, all_10_2)) = -1) % 9.20/2.03 | % 9.20/2.03 | SIMP: (47) implies: % 9.20/2.03 | (48) ~ ($sum(sc_32_0_0, $product(196, all_10_2)) = -1) % 9.20/2.03 | % 9.20/2.03 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (2) with 0, 2, all_49_0, simplifying with (44) % 9.20/2.03 | gives: % 9.20/2.04 | (49) all_49_0 = 2 % 9.20/2.04 | % 9.20/2.04 | REDUCE: (43), (49) imply: % 9.20/2.04 | (50) f0(2, 1) = all_24_0 % 9.20/2.04 | % 9.20/2.04 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (formula_1) with 2, 1, all_24_0, simplifying with % 9.20/2.04 | (50) gives: % 9.20/2.04 | (51) $product(4, 3) = all_24_0 % 9.20/2.04 | % 9.20/2.04 | THEORY_AXIOM GroebnerMultiplication: % 9.20/2.04 | (52) ! [v0: int] : ! [v1: int] : ! [v2: int] : ! [v3: int] : ($sum(v2, % 9.20/2.04 | $product(196, v1)) = -1 | ~ ($product($sum(v3, 2), $sum(v3, 2)) = % 9.20/2.04 | v0) | ~ ($product(v0, v1) = $difference(-1, v2)) | ~ % 9.20/2.04 | ($product(4, 3) = v3)) % 9.20/2.04 | % 9.20/2.04 | GROUND_INST: instantiating (52) with v0, all_10_2, sc_32_0_0, all_24_0, % 9.20/2.04 | simplifying with (35), (39), (51) gives: % 9.20/2.04 | (53) $sum(sc_32_0_0, $product(196, all_10_2)) = -1 % 9.20/2.04 | % 9.20/2.04 | REDUCE: (48), (53) imply: % 9.20/2.04 | (54) $false % 9.20/2.04 | % 9.20/2.04 | CLOSE: (54) is inconsistent. % 9.20/2.04 | % 9.20/2.04 End of proof % 9.20/2.04 % SZS output end Proof for theBenchmark % 9.20/2.04 % 9.20/2.04 1401ms %------------------------------------------------------------------------------